@discjude Thank You! I'm Glad It Could Turn Out To Be Helpful To You! If You Keep Track, I'd Love To

@discjude Thank you! I'm glad it could turn out to be helpful to you! If you keep track, I'd love to know how many you manage to use—that's a cool idea.

I'm thrilled the Japeth one got to you! (When I came up with his list, I specifically thought: "I wonder if Jude would have anything to say about it?")

Kei is kind of a hard one, to me. Off the top of my head, I'd assign him: turning point, in medias res, and third person limited pov, which is just another way of saying he's a little unknowable, and/or I don't know him well enough as a character aside from the role he played in forwarding the plot. And, I'm referencing his sudden appearance and relevance.

⸻

I should have assigned symbolism to someone, so that goes to Sophie, Guinevere, and the Storian.

Arthur (and the kingdom of Camelot itself) get magical realism/fabulism, and haunting the narrative. And a less modern way of defining Lancelot could've been "the vernacular." Also, Merlin gets puns.

And, I came up with overlap for Rhian I and Rhian II: oxymoron, paradox, and passive voice (especially when used to displace blame onto another, or to leave out a designated, clear subject performing the deed).

⸻

Latin is a roundabout way of saying: “Rafal is old.”

(In One True King, I'm pretty sure Sophie freaks out and derides him, calling him "Father Evil.")

The more elaborate explanation is that he does not and will never suffer from "belatedness." (Except, in the context of Soman drawing inspiration from elsewhere.)

Rafal is the “first,” in a sense, which lends to him the special, rare advantage of not feeling self-conscious of his work. He was likely the "innovator" of Evil, to an extent, we could speculate, and I doubt he was predated by too many exceptional villains, especially considering how he's held up by those at The Black Rabbit as some kind of exemplar, the Master of Evil, who gets a free pass in on some basis of his actual prodigiousness, something other than his just being a feared authority figure.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but: every other villain or antagonist, major or minor, in the entire series (not counting the Storian) exists after him in time, or exists because of him and the influence he exerts, the hostility he elicits, the violence he incites. He's the proverbial "giant," and others stand on his shoulders.

Here, I briefly trawled the internet:

"Quick Reference. In Harold Bloom's theory of literary history (see anxiety of influence), the predicament of the poet who feels that previous poets have already said all that there is to say, leaving no room for new creativity. From: belatedness in The Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms » Subjects: Literature."

"Belatedness definition: The state or quality of being belated or of being too late."

In addition, while Latin is mostly a reference to Rafal’s age and his lack of suffering from belatedness, it's also the provenance of lots of words from the English language. (I know the Greeks as epic poets came first, but Latin works better for these comparative purposes.) That's why I tied the concept of the etymological roots of words into his list.

If Rafal were a modern scholar, I'm tempted to say he'd pursue the study of philology because it works well for him, as a symbol:

"A theory of language development which traces the ‘family tree’ of modern natural languages like English, French, and German back to their historical origins. The central point of interest of such research is to show the common ancestry of words dispersed across several languages."

Or the common ancestry of all Evil. Horrible, isn't it?

Plus, we might have a sliver of evidence for this so-called "great inheritance" in Fall. Whatever he said to the demimagus in its language or in the language of sorcery (or if we take into account the spells and incantations of SGE in general) they all seem to be derived from Latin, as is common practice among authors.

Thus, he's old—despite being part of an archetype greater than himself anyway. Because, actually, sorry to break it to you: he’s an “Archimago” figure!

(Well, by my interpretation, at least. And besides that, other literary characters I don't know probably predate Edmund Spenser's Archimago as well.)

Thusly, we have:

Lecherous, Bad "Catholic" Rafal -> Making Good Holy Knights Doubt Their True Love, Truth, and Faith & Posing As An Ancient Hermit Since 1590.

I promise I'm not insane. If anyone would like some reference:

SGE Characters as Literary Things

(Not all of these are actual literary or rhetorical devices; some are just writing techniques, forms, genres, mediums, etc.)

This is a bit abstract, so I’m curious about how subjective these might be. Does anyone agree or disagree? And feel free to make additions if you think I left anything out, or request another character that isn’t here.

Hopefully this makes (intuitive?) sense. As always, I'm willing to explain my thought process behind any of the things I've listed.

Also, anyone can treat this like a “Tag Yourself” meme, if you want. Whose list do you most relate to, use, or encounter?

⸻

LANCELOT (I know—how odd that I’m starting with a minor character and not Rafal, but wait. There’s a method to my madness. Also, watch out for overlap!):

Metonymy, synecdoche (no, literally, to me, these are him.)

Zeugma

Analogy

Figures of speech

Slang, argot

Colloquialisms

Idioms

TEDROS:

Simile

Metaphor

Rhyming couplets

Rhyme schemes

Sonnets

Commercial fiction

Coming-of-age genre

Line enjambment

Overuse of commas

Cadence, prose speech

Waxing poetic, verse (not prose)

Alliteration

Kinesthetic imagery

Phallic imagery/sword sexual innuendos (sorry)

The chivalric romance genre

AGATHA:

Anaphora, repetition

Semicolon, periods

Line breaks

Terse, dry prose

Semantics (not syntax)

Elegy

Resonance

Consonance, alliteration

Pseudonym

Narrative parallels

Realism

Satire

SOPHIE:

Sophistry (yes, there is a word for it!)

Imagery

Italics, emphasis

Em dash

Aphrodisiac imagery

Unreliable narrator, bias

Rashomon effect

Syntax (not semantics)

Diction

Chiasmus (think: “Fair is foul and foul is fair.”)

Rhetorical purpose

Provocation, calls to action

Voice, writing style

Rhetorical modes: pathos, logos, ethos

Metaphor

Hyperbole, exaggeration

Sensationalism, journalism

Surrealism

Verisimilitude

Egocentrism

Callbacks (but not foreshadowing or call-forwards)

Narrative parallels

Paralepsis, occultatio, apophasis, denial

Hypothetical dialogue

Monologue

JAPETH:

Sibilance

Lacuna

Villanelle (an obsessive, repetitive form of poetry)

Soliloquy

ARIC:

Sentence fragments

RHIAN (TCY):

Unreliable narrator

Setup, payoff

Chekhov’s gun

Epistolary novel

RHIAN (prequels):

Multiple povs

Perspective

Dramatic irony

Situational irony

Chiaroscuro (in imagery)

Endpapers

Frontispiece

Deckled edges

Narrative parallels

Foreshadowing

Call-forwards

Foil

Death of the author

RAFAL:

Omniscient narrator

Perspective

Surrealism

Etymology

Word families or 'linguistic ecosystems'

Latin

Verbal irony

Gallows humor

Narrative parallels

Call-forwards

Circular endings

Parallel sentences or balanced sentence structure

Narrative parallels

Foil

Juxtaposition

Authorial intent (“return of the author”)

HESTER:

Protagonist

Allusions

Gothic imagery

ANADIL:

Defamiliarization

Deuteragonist (second most important character in relation to the protagonist)

Psychic distance

Sterile prose

Forewords, prologues

Works cited pages

DOT:

Tone

Gustatory imagery

Tritagonist (third most important character in relation to the protagonist)

KIKO:

Sidekick

Falling action

Dedications, author's notes, epigraph, acknowledgements

Epitaph (Tristan)

BEATRIX:

Pacing

Rising Action

Climax

HORT:

Unrequited love

Falling resolution

Anticlimax

Malapropism

Innuendo

Asides

Brackets, parentheses

Cliché

EVELYN SADER:

Synesthetic imagery

Villanelle

Foreshadowing

AUGUST SADER:

Stream of consciousness style

Imagery

Foreshadowing

Coming-of-age genre

Elegy

Omniscience

Rhetorical questions

Time skips, non-linear narratives

Epilogues

MARIALENA:

Diabolus ex machina

Malapropism

Malaphors, mixed metaphors

Slant rhyme

Caveat

Parentheses

Footnotes

MERLIN:

Deus ex machina

Iambic pentameter

Filler words

BETTINA:

Screenwriting

Shock value

Rafal Has Baba Yaga Morality

I can't quite contain or explain my evil ways Or explain why I'm not sane All I can say is this is your warning

This one is less of a theory and more of an observation. It's also partway a "defense" of Rafal, but not really.

Note: The "you" referenced doesn't refer to anyone in particular. It's just the pov of a would-be victim, or the collective, generalized "you" that would form an audience.

⸻

Rafal has very "Baba Yaga," "The Scorpion and the Frog," "Dead Dove: Do Not Eat," "It's exactly what it says on the tin" morality, but that's not to say he's at all predictable. He's predictably unpredictable. He is the poisonous frog or bird, draped in naturally bright colors, that is very obviously toxic.

And no one believes him or his outward "labels" when they wrongly give him the uncalled for benefit of the doubt (probably because he's intentionally attractive)! And it usually works out in his favor! Which is a strength in a way. It's only the rare Good he does on occasion that leads people to believe otherwise, or think too highly of him, when really, he's flawed and human, humanly grey.

From there, we know he has the capacity to be both lethal and kind, like the figure of Baba Yaga in the tales:

"Baba Yaga is an ambiguous figure in many folktales and legends. While sometimes she is depicted as a cannibalistic, child devouring witch, other times she is a benevolent sorceress who assists the hero or bestows knowledge."

His morality is variable. He can be both Good and Evil when the situation calls for it. He is adaptable, flexible, and not 100% consistent like Baba Yaga is, not any one thing or role.

I've never read the source material, but this quote I've seen exemplifies him well:

“He is a weapon, a killer. Do not forget it. You can use a spear as a walking stick, but that will not change its nature.” ― Madeline Miller, The Song of Achilles

As for the tale of "The Scorpion and the Frog," referenced in TLEA, he often doesn't lead people on. They do that all on their own with their assumptions and he reaps the benefits. Oftentimes, it's others' own faults for screwing themselves over. They know cognitively that he's Evil, but the fact doesn't actually register in their brains.

And that is a feat in itself, in their world, in the world he lives in. It is absolutely commendable in a perverse way, so I must applaud him at this point.

Despite not bothering to present himself, despite not caring about presentation (on a conscious level, if that's the lie he tells himself?), and despite presenting himself as the worst, at his personal worst, his poorer nature, he still surprises people with his humanity.

But, what they should never be surprised by is his Evil. You do not forget what a spear is capable of just because it's used as a walking stick for however long. You do not suddenly trust a ravenous, wild animal because it appears domesticated.

He steps forward as his worst self, his craftiest, least trustworthy self, that is artful and guileful and who will outwit you, who will outfox you, and you still trust him, while not managing to feel insane for doing so. Somehow, you're compelled to trust him, if only because he's so magnetic and attractive of a force, like a certain type of true Evil sometimes is, that charisma. He attracts people and doesn't repel them. Again, it's not always consciously his fault—it's just a quality to his very being.

And, if you still lie to yourself and think he's not using you after that, after glaring, flashing, blaring warning signs, you have only yourself to blame.

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

Yet, in this particular case, even the first time, you haven't been fooled. You were never fooled. You just thought otherwise, awarded Rafal the benefit of the doubt, and played the fool.

You've only chosen to believe what you wanted to see and have led yourself astray. Because, he never fooled you. He was not the active agent in that last sentence. Read that line again, I ask you. He never fooled you.

You built your own illusions of him, in your mind, by your perceptions. You've painted Rafal differently than how he truly appears in his true form. You've laid your own bait, set your own trap, made your own bed, dug your own grave. It's often not entirely his "fault." (Unless, he's in conscious manipulation mode.)

That is why you are the author of your own misfortune, and he is not. He is "blameless," in that one regard. He is not whom you've made him into. Thus, never trust him is the moral here. And that is what everyone should know, if they ever want to beat Rafal at his own game.

Except Rhian. Rhian should have been the one person to trust Rafal, unlike all the rest. But the opposite happened. All the rest trusted him, and Rhian did not. (The irony!)

"And so it is written." You got exactly what you told him you wanted (if we go by "exact phrasing" logic, like with a rogue genie) or, alternatively, you got what he told you you'd get. He just outmaneuvered you.

The fascinating thing is: he never lies about what he is and whom he truly believes himself to be: Evil. It's his true nature (discounting his arc in Fall for a moment).

People can only blame themselves when they expect him to miraculously rise above and set his best foot forward. It just isn't what he does. And that's just like how the scorpion acts with the frog. The frog naively believed the scorpion would betray its own nature. But the scorpion is a scorpion. What else can you expect? Each of Rafal's victims had been too soft and idealistic about him.

He is an honest villain, a constructive villain, not a destructive one, as I once sort of coined the term, in an earlier post.

Once, in the Doom Room, Rafal even told Midas outright that he could offer Midas nothing, truthfully, aside from trying to get Midas home to Gavaldon. Probably, because in that moment, honesty would have served him better than a lie could have.

That is one thing I find strange and that I somewhat "admire," if you can say that about a clear-cut villain. For all he does, he is (almost always) straightforward and open with his plots. (Unless he withholds information, but that is not lying. Instead, such behavior falls under strategic lies of omission, a completely separate matter.)

It must be another trick up his sleeve, a weapon in mental arsenal. He is often open, clear, and honest about his intentions, say, with James and simply letting him die after he's served his purpose, at least. James wasn't kept the dark.

The point still stands. Rafal doesn't represent himself as something that he's not. Sure, he is a trickster, but he doesn't deny it, or lie about it.

He never leads people to believe he is someone he is not, or when he does, how much of it can you blame on him when everyone already knows he's the very public figure of the literal Evil School Master?

He owns his identity, (or what he sees himself as)—which is as close to the truth as he can realistically get because it's all he knows. He's not an omniscient being.

He does the "best" that he can, and he's usually not wrong about souls, others' souls, that is. Not his own. Apparently. But, few literary characters are capable of complete and total self-awareness, and Rafal is no exception to that. If he were 100% self-aware, the story wouldn't work. That said, I think he was more self-aware than Rhian, initially.

To reference the trickster archetype in relation to him again: he can really swing either way. Everything is up to his whims, impulses, or calculated designs, at any given moment, even if he appears to play "fair," meaning, usually, that he plays with interpretations, loopholes and the like, while staying within certain constraints.

He's not discreet like Evil Rhian had been for a stint. He had been proud of his Evil, to an extent. So, perhaps, that grants him a little leeway or likability. At the start, he simply isn't ashamed of himself, for working situations and people to his advantage (until his conscience catches up to him a little). His Evil is the high-flying banner he and his Nevers unite under; it's their common purpose/drive, to live and to strive for.

But, it always bears repeating: His reputation always precedes him as the Evil School Master.

So, again, you can't blame him for anything Evil he's done, can't pin it on being unexpected because it's always expected. You let your guard down. You can only justifiably be surprised when he does Good, and let that temper and moderate your expectations. (And the inverse of all this is probably why we sometimes might have expected too much, not too little, as is the case with Rafal, from poor Rhian.)

If Evil is what all have come to expect, like what James Hook expects from Rafal: a cold, soulless person, driven by deep villainous purpose, and Rafal doesn't directly tell anyone otherwise about his nature, no one can argue Rafal didn't play "fair," by those technical standards.

They knew exactly whom they were dealing with, and (unconsciously?) chose not to believe the man himself, the one who should know himself best.

By the Rules of Good or Evil, you expect him to be unpredictable, and you can call him out on being unpredictable because he's known for it. Known to commit atrocities, even when you seem to have trust between the both of you. That's why you can never tell.

I don't think Rafal actively encourages or cultivates trust in other people (unless it's a case of his deliberate manipulation). Part of the facade others perceive could just be his "trustworthy" aura.

And, people still expect better from him, implicitly! But how wrong they are. If nothing else, the misplaced trust probably stems from the aura he exudes as I can't think of another reason at the moment.

Because, like always, they put their trust in him—he didn't force them to hand it over—so, they have exactly themselves to blame, when they underestimate him, or think they can beat him.

That's why, in the end, I feel like the phrase: “It takes one to know one” applies really well to Rafal because he continually saves Rhian from being taken advantage of by men a lot like himself, considering how he constantly takes advantage of and uses others.

Now, I'll just leave you with this parting thought: as a villain, Rafal weaponizes the naivete and stupidity that is already there, already present in his victims. So, when Rhian sheds his naivete, he can no longer be used by his brother.

TLDR: Rafal is everyone else's "Vulcan" in a world full of trusting "Rhians."

How would Vulcan react to Evil!Rhian? And how would Evil! Rhian react to Vulcan.

Give me your honest and true opinion on it.

I believe that if Vulcan met Evil Rhian, he'd probably run for the hills, flee in order to preserve his life. Can't possibly use his "Duckling" anymore now that Rhian’s corrupted. And Vulcan was seemingly the first in Rise to recognize the rot within Rhian after all, so we shockingly owe him some credit to his intellect, for once.

Though, on the off chance that Vulcan reacts with stupidity and not cowardice, he would likely be stupid enough to not comprehend the change in Rhian's demeanor (or alternatively, stupid enough to challenge Rhian as a usurper of the Schools, regardless of any warning signs). Thus, he would fall into the trap of needling Rhian until he very quickly provokes Rhian, consequently, getting himself burnt to a crisp. So, get vaporized Vulcan. Hah.

As for Rhian reacting to Vulcan, I think he wouldn't fall prey to this loathly man, this horrid interloper, this trespasser. He'd probably think he does Evil better than Vulcan ever could, considering that Vulcan is so superficially, outwardly, flagrantly Evil that it robs him of all actual menace. Meanwhile, Evil Rhian is far more subtle about how he goes about doing anything, keeping his reputation with the Kingdom Council intact as he seizes power.

(rando assumptions) you’re pretty cool introverted and intelligent, i feel like you get pretty good grades at school and you hang out with your friends in the library or something and maybe you sometimes like going off to relax in really dark rooms/places by yourself and you stare out the windows when the sky is cloudy and grey and also maybe you have autism or synesthesia? i dunno

Glad tidings, Anon! Never thought I'd say this, but congratulations, I suppose it is possible for an ask game to have a "winner" since you've taken me aback.

And I stopped to wonder about whether I'd been plagued by spyware. /j

All this is to say you're right about several things you've put forth here. If anyone wants more specifics or is curious, I may answer you in the comments or through DMs.

You look SO COOL, Rafal! But can you live up to that incredible outfit, or are you still a stick-in-the-mud?

was this an excuse to draw rafal in a cool outift? yes. will i make this a series? great question. might do a poll

I’m convinced that Grackles are the "Rafals" of the bird world. Just look at that hauteur. It’s at once inspiring and infuriating.